Press Reports about Carl Philip and Sofia Hellqvist, Part 2: April 2012 - June 2014

[An Ard Ri]

Ok this thread is fastly spiraling out of control and way off topic, I'm closing it for Moderator's review!

 

[LadyFinn]

Sofia Hellqvist at Capetown, Project Playground's football teams participated at a football tournament.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BGDVB-5CYAIODEn.jpg:large

 

[CrownPrincess5]

Gosh, when will CP be done with this girl!

 

[Dman]

I hope they had fun.

 

[HRHHermione]

I hope they had fun.

Me too! It looks like it was probably a nice day. I like seeing her Project Playground work.

 

[USCtrojan]

Me too! It looks like it was probably a nice day. I like seeing her Project Playground work.

What exactly is ProjectPlayground?

 

[HRHHermione]

What exactly is ProjectPlayground?

Project Playground is a charity Sofia co-founded that provides recreational activities for children living in poverty. It's pretty neat.

http://www.project-playground.org/en/

 

[HRHHermione]

By the way, I found this picture of Sofia awhile back, and I love it. She looks very comfortable and happy around these kids, and I think this side of her personality is not often remarked on by people who follow this relationship:

http://asa.svenskdam.se/files/2010/01/DSC02806.JPG.w300h400.jpg

Here is the original article the pictures were placed in: Carl Philips Sofia Hellqvist plockar prinsesspoäng | Åsas kungliga Europa

And I always assumed people were right and she only got interested in charity after she started dating Carl Philip, but apparently she was doing work in Ghana as early as 2007.

 

[LadyFinn]

Sofia told at a visit to Finland, that she visited Africa shortly when she was 17 years old. In the autumn 2009, after meeting Carl Philip in Båstad and they started calling each other and then dating, Sofia went to Ghana for a charity work and stayed there about two months.
Sofia's photos from Ghana, posted from 16 September-11 October 2009
www.sofiahellqvist.org | Facebook

 

[Meraude]

I disagree here. There was a lot of talk that Sofia shouldn't be given a title because Chris also doesn't get one now and it would not be fair if he gets none when she gets one because of gender equality.

Yes, there was also talk about her past, but that was not the main argument 5, 6, 7 pages ago. The main argument was gender equality which is not the right argument IMO.

My objection to a royal title for the spouse of Carl Philip have nothing to do with whom the spouse was/is/are going to be, I would have made the same objections if he had chosen his former girl-friend Emma(?) as a spouse, but as she was seldom seen or discussed in the Swedish media during their relationship, nor were there any lengthy discussions here, there were no reason to discuss a title for her.

Sofia on the other hand has never been media-shy and she is and have been a public figure, whether it is because of her past (Swedish media has always had an interest in people who have participated in Big Brother and other reality shows), or because of her relationship with Carl Philip, and there has been a very lengthy discussion about her future as a possible spouse and a future title for her, so that's why I have been discussing it here.

To me it's the gender equality that matters when it comes to the titles of the spouses of the junior royals, not who that future spouse is.

 

[CrownPrincess5]

I personally think Carl Phillips wife should be given the Princess title. It's just that Sofia with her questionable past and fame-seeking-self really shouldn't be given a title. I can't begin to imagine calling someone a princess who I've seen in the nude. It's like Kim Kardashian becoming a princess...God forbid!

 

[NGalitzine]

. I can't begin to imagine calling someone a princess who I've seen in the nude. !

Really. The list is fairly long. Just off the top of my head Prince Charles, Prince Andrew, the Duchess of Cambridge, Prnce Harry, Prince Albert, Princess Caroline, Princess Stephanie, Andrea Casiraghi, Pierre Casiraghi have all be photographed in the nude. Even former American First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis was photographed in the nude and those pictures appeared in Penthouse magazine. Granted only Stephanie actually posed for the pics (wearing a large red ribbon for AIDS) but nudity really is not that big a deal.

 

[LadyFinn]

Seeing some royal in the nude isn't a big deal for me. But Sofia posing in those photos, that is a totally different story.

 

[Empress Merel]

Seeing some royal in the nude isn't a big deal for me. But Sofia posing in those photos, that is a totally different story.

Which were photos taken before she met CP. The pictures are there and available. The best option is to get over them and realise she's not going anywhere at the moment.

 

[Anne2]

Seeing some royal in the nude isn't a big deal for me. But Sofia posing in those photos, that is a totally different story.

I fully agree on this!! I can only refer again to the 6or7 videos posted on youtube about Sofia, from which her motivations and business can be understood. But people can change their mind and have different phases in their life, based on new personal convictions, or other reasons...

 

[Dman]

I can't pass judgment on Sofia and what she did all those years ago is nowhere near bad as some would like to make it.

 

[Nice Nofret]

It's not only a question of 'bad', but also of how to take s.o. who did soft-porn serious.

Imagine her to greet State-Visitors from the middle-east? Do you think that would promote Sweden? I doubt it.

 

[tommy100]

Months ago I was on this forum daily as I was so shocked at the idea of CP and Sofia marrying or being together but as time goes on I'm less and less bothered about it.
Maybe CP will have to do what his uncle Prince Bertil did and play the long waiting game because I can imagine in a few years there would be hardly any problem with them marrying (so long as Sofia doesn't appear like THAT in any other magazines!)

 

[Dman]

Sofia never did full on porn.

 

[USCtrojan]

Sofia never did full on porn.

Soft and "full on" is all the same!

 

[HRHHermione]

Honestly, the way people treat young women who have worked in adult entertainment- the judgment and ostracism and slut-shaming- is why I'd love to see Sofia marry into the royal family. That would strike a huge blow against that kind of dehumanizing behavior. I know lots of people who have no trouble looking at those kinds of pictures but who then turn around and judge the women who posed.

It's a predatory industry. Lots of young women fall into it at a certain point in their lives and that doesn't mean they should be treated like garbage and looked down on for the rest of their lives.

 

[Dman]

I think Prince Carl Philip and the royal family see Sofia for who she is inside and not throwing stones at her because she posed with a snake in a magazine years ago. They are the ones with the open mind and open hearts.

 

[Marengo]

Honestly, the way people treat young women who have worked in adult entertainment- the judgment and ostracism and slut-shaming- .

I am sure that if Chris O'Neill posed naked for magazines when he was 16 & at later occassions people would be having simular objections.

 

[Empress Merel]

I am sure that if Chris O'Neill posed naked for magazines when he was 16 & at later occassionspeople would be having simular objections.

No, they wouldn't. Simply because he is male.

And soft and full on is not the same. Unless there is a video of her out on the internet where she has sex with someone, it's not.

 

[HRHHermione]

No, they wouldn't. Simply because he is male.

And soft and full on is not the same. Unless there is a video of her out on the internet where she has sex with someone, it's not.

I agree. Men and women are treated very differently on this particular issue, and women are treated much more harshly. Also, young men aren't treated the same way by the industry.

 

[Ish]

Based on the pictures that I've seen, Sofia hasn't actually been in porn.

Pictures that simply feature nudity are not porn. There are 3 different forms of nude photos that can be taken: glamour photos, soft core pornography photos, and hardcore pornography pictures.

Glamour photos feature subjects portrayed in romantic or sexually alluring ways - they may be clothed or semi nude. The intent is not to deliberately arouse the viewer.

Pornographic photos are photos that explicitly display sexual subject matter for the intent of arousing the viewer. In porn sexual acts are shot - in soft core in a more suggestive manner, and in hardcore in a more explicit manner.

In short - suggestive photos that don't display any sex are glamour, photos that suggestively display sex are softcore porn, and photos that explicitly display sex are hardcore porn.

What Sofia did in Slits is glamour, not porn.

 

[nascarlucy]

Any woman who poses nude should know that these pictures can later come back to haunt them even in countries where attitudes about this are much more progessive than the United States. This issue has come up relating to custody of children and in court and civil cases and it's usually in the context of a moral issue or fitness issues as far as children goes.

In the case of Sofia it's been both a moral issue and a issue of whether or not she is a suitable partner for Prince Carl Phlliip should they marry. If Prince Carl Phillip wasn't royal, I don't think this would be much of an issue in Sweden or elsewhere unless she married someone whose father was a member of the clergy or someone who was clergy.

When it comes to marriage, royal household are more conservative than others on this issue.

 

[blauerengel]

Really. The list is fairly long. Just off the top of my head Prince Charles, Prince Andrew, the Duchess of Cambridge, Prnce Harry, Prince Albert, Princess Caroline, Princess Stephanie, Andrea Casiraghi, Pierre Casiraghi have all be photographed in the nude. Even former American First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis was photographed in the nude and those pictures appeared in Penthouse magazine. Granted only Stephanie actually posed for the pics (wearing a large red ribbon for AIDS) but nudity really is not that big a deal.

What is concerning us most is Sophia´s attention-seeking personality,not her nude pictures.All the royals mentioned above were photographed nude without their consent (except Stephanie,but I always considered her to be the wild child of the family,who happens to be born to a princess.)
Supposed someone stalks you,gets a clear view into your bedroom and makes a video or picture of you while you are inside-whatever you might be doing there and whoever you are doing it with-I would definitely NOT call you a porn star or nude model because the photographer broke into your privacy and stole the right to your pictures.
Especially for Catherine it must have been quite annoying to have that pictures printed because she usually never gets any foot wrong since she got married and that paparazzi invaded her private life.
To use that against her is very rude,should the Duchess wear a burka for the rest of her life only that no shameless person can snap a picture of her without clothes?Some ppl suggestet that she should NEVER wear bikini again and only get undresses in absolutely shielded private places,but when she goes to an exclusive resort and gets off her top in a rented villa or hotel doesn´t give anyone the right to disrespect her privacy.
I don´t like the way that the media is treating private lifes-if someone decides to do a job where they are expected to wear no clothes and pose seductively it is their right to do so and it is a job that will pay very good salary.It is a fully legal job to be a Playboy model!IMO people should get more angry about politicians who are corrupt, or ppl who are raping children and women,but nude models are only doing their job for which there is a huge demand!Why not bashing the ppl who buy that kind of magazines instead?If men wanted to see women in let´s say scuba diving gear and pay loads of money to do so,all the women who are currently working for Penthouse & Co would do scuba diving pictures-
it´s supply & demand

 

[NGalitzine]

When it comes to marriage, royal household are more conservative than others on this issue.

Perhaps, although this may turn out to be a case of some posters being more conservative than the royal family.

 

[Bine221]

Based on the pictures that I've seen, Sofia hasn't actually been in porn.

Pictures that simply feature nudity are not porn. There are 3 different forms of nude photos that can be taken: glamour photos, soft core pornography photos, and hardcore pornography pictures.

Glamour photos feature subjects portrayed in romantic or sexually alluring ways - they may be clothed or semi nude. The intent is not to deliberately arouse the viewer.

Pornographic photos are photos that explicitly display sexual subject matter for the intent of arousing the viewer. In porn sexual acts are shot - in soft core in a more suggestive manner, and in hardcore in a more explicit manner.

In short - suggestive photos that don't display any sex are glamour, photos that suggestively display sex are softcore porn, and photos that explicitly display sex are hardcore porn.

What Sofia did in Slits is glamour, not porn.

Absolutely my opinion as well: erotic pics, but clearly no porn. And yes, that IS a difference.

Not that it means, this is a phantastic start into a Royal Career

BYe Bine